4 comments:

Exept that's not really the case. She's not exactly an idiot - she's an accomplished writer, philanthropist, and scholar who, if anyone was going to benefit from being a legacy - well, I have no problem if she does.

"Philanthropist" -- born into lots of money, she's spent time giving away a tiny fraction of it. Not exactly impressive.

"Accomplished writer" -- According to Amazon.com the only book she wrote was a compilation of speeches & poems. She's also listed as co-author of a book that has no sales, no reviews, and that's not even carried by Amazon. And we all know about the Kennedy's as "co-authors," right?

"Scholar" -- she did a little fund raising for NY City Schools.

Is this the most qualified person in NY?

I think the attempted defense just makes my point even stronger -- Whitman should apply to be a Senator from NY -- all it takes is money and name recognition!

So, leaving aside, the non-reasonable argument that because other people attempt to get jobs for which they aren't qualified, Meg Whitman should be supported when she goes for a job for which she isn't qualified: let's get down to brass tacks:

Why not admit that business administration and government administration are simply different?

It's like saying Michael Phelps should get into synchronized swimming because that and swim races both occur in a pool. It's a silly, naive view that has - time and again - proved false!

To quote from the title of a great Brit comedy series - assuming you're in Cali - "Look Around You."